*

«New Greek rules stigmatise NGOs working with migrants»

«The Greek government is targeting NGOs working with migrants as part of a politicised effort to curtail asylum»

«New ministerial rules introduced earlier this year and inserted into a wider migration law in May only apply to civil society groups that deals with refugees and asylum»

«Athens says the rules are needed for greater transparency and accountability but NGOs argue they also discriminate and are almost impossible to implement for smaller grassroots organisations»

«the new rules impose extra conditions on the registration of civil society outfits»

«The law maintains a clear discretion on the ministry of migration and asylum to deny registration – even if the requirements are met»

«NGOs that help asylum seekers are now required to register with the ministry of asylum and migration»

«They are also required to be certified should they wish to receive state-level or EU funding. …. they are required to show financial statements dating back two years»

«that it only targets NGOs working with refugees, and requires they get audited by certified auditors, and other bureaucratic obligations, that risk creating a chilling effect.»

«This new process will exclude many organisations because they don’t have the budget to cover this exorbitant costs»

«Greece currently has around 86 registered NGOs working on migration. Of those, 73 are national and 13 international.»

«The previous government in Greece, voted out of power last summer, had set up a registry for NGOs»

«As it stands, the law seems to have been activated in order to punish and exclude NGOs from public affairs instead of regulating their action by integrating them into a transparent and accountable collaborative framework with the state and citizens»

«politicians from Greece’s ruling party New Democracy, who have accused some NGOs of smuggling and people trafficking»

«politicians …. have accused some NGOs of smuggling and people trafficking»

E la Commissione Europea tace.

*

The Greek government is targeting NGOs working with migrants as part of a politicised effort to curtail asylum.

New ministerial rules introduced earlier this year and inserted into a wider migration law in May only apply to civil society groups that deals with refugees and asylum.

Athens says the rules are needed for greater transparency and accountability but NGOs argue they also discriminate and are almost impossible to implement for smaller grassroots organisations.

Drafted by the Greek ministry of finance and the ministry of migration and asylum, the new rules impose extra conditions on the registration of civil society outfits.

“The law maintains a clear discretion on the ministry of migration and asylum to deny registration – even if the requirements are met,” said Minos Mouzourakis, a legal officer at Refugee Support Aegean.

NGOs that help asylum seekers are now required to register with the ministry of asylum and migration. They are also required to be certified should they wish to receive state-level or EU funding.

In affect, the rules essentially prevent new NGOs from registering – because they are required to show financial statements dating back two years.

Chilling effect

Melina Spathari at Terre des Hommes Hellas, an international NGO, says a centralised updated registry of NGOs will enhance transparency.

But she pointed out that it only targets NGOs working with refugees, and requires they get audited by certified auditors, and other bureaucratic obligations, that risk creating a chilling effect.

“This new process will exclude many organisations because they don’t have the budget to cover this exorbitant costs. We are talking about very small civil society organisations, grass roots,” she said.

It also means asylum seekers and refugees may stand to lose out given many rely on the NGOs for basic needs in Greece.

Greece currently has around 86 registered NGOs working on migration. Of those, 73 are national and 13 international.

The previous government in Greece, voted out of power last summer, had set up a registry for NGOs. But the new registry for NGO staff created earlier this year is adding a whole new layer of requirements.

“This has happened in the context of a deteriorating public narrative around NGOs and specifically NGOs that work with asylum seekers and migrants and people on the move in general,” said Adriana Tidona, a researcher on migration at Amnesty International’s European office.

Tidona says the new rules are posing serious questions when it comes to the freedom of association, the freedom of expression, discrimination and the right to privacy.

“It is also concerning that the registration is basically entrusted to an authority which is not independent from the government,” she said.

Also known as the ‘special coordinating secretary’, it can approve or revoke registrations at any moment.

Doctors of the World Greece said the secretary’s power is too great, noting it will be able to reject an application even if all the legal requirements are met.

“As it stands, the law seems to have been activated in order to punish and exclude NGOs from public affairs instead of regulating their action by integrating them into a transparent and accountable collaborative framework with the state and citizens,” said Elli Xenou at Doctors of the World Greece.

Such moves appear to align with public statements made by politicians from Greece’s ruling party New Democracy, who have accused some NGOs of smuggling and people trafficking.

*

«Over 400 migrants have been picked up by the Libyan coast guard and returned to Libya over the weekend»

«That’s according to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), which called the action “unacceptable.”»

«The UN organization for migration decried the fact that this weekend, over 400 Europe-bound migrants were returned to Libya by the Libyan coast guard in several operations»

«The IOM counted 301 people who were intercepted and taken back to Tripoli on Saturday, March 14 and a further 105 on two different boats on Sunday, March 15.»

«It is unacceptable for this to continue despite repeated calls to put an end to the return of vulnerable people to detention and abuse»

«Alarm Phone accused Frontex, the Maltese Search and Rescue coordinators RCC and the “so-called” Libyan coast guards of working together to push back migrants attempting to cross the Mediterranean.»

«the Maltese RCC had “instructed the Libyan coast guard to enter a European Search and Rescue (SAR) zone in order to abduct about 49 people and force them back to Libya.”»

«One of the principles of international law is that those rescued must be disembarked in a safe harbor»

«The news agency Associated Press AP said that most of those returned to Tripoli were “taken to detention centers in Libya where there are serious concerns over their safety.”»

«Continued cooperation between EU and Libya»

«The commissioner [Dunja Mijatovic] said she was “gravely concerned about certain types of assistance provided to Libya which have resulted in increased interceptions of migrants and asylum seekers at sea, and their subsequent return to Libya, where they are subjected to serious human rights violations.”»

*

Over 400 migrants have been picked up by the Libyan coast guard and returned to Libya over the weekend. That’s according to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), which called the action “unacceptable.”

The UN organization for migration decried the fact that this weekend, over 400 Europe-bound migrants were returned to Libya by the Libyan coast guard in several operations. The IOM counted 301 people who were intercepted and taken back to Tripoli on Saturday, March 14 and a further 105 on two different boats on Sunday, March 15.

The IOM communications officer Safa Msehli said: “It is unacceptable for this to continue despite repeated calls to put an end to the return of vulnerable people to detention and abuse.”

The organization Alarm Phone which provides “independent support for people crossing the Mediterranean Sea to Europe” and tracks many of the migrant crossings, also confirmed a group of 49 migrants who were picked up by the Libyan coast guard and returned to Libya on March 14.

Tweeting on March 15, Alarm Phone called this operation an “illegal pushback.”

In a press release the same day entitled “returned to war and torture,” Alarm Phone accused Frontex, the Maltese Search and Rescue coordinators RCC and the “so-called” Libyan coast guards of working together to push back migrants attempting to cross the Mediterranean.

‘A grave violation of international law’

The press release stated that the Maltese RCC coordinated the operation with Frontex in which 49 migrants were pushed back from the Maltese search and rescue zone to Libya, via the Libyan coast guard. They claimed the Maltese RCC had “instructed the Libyan coast guard to enter a European Search and Rescue (SAR) zone in order to abduct about 49 people and force them back to Libya.”

Alarm Phone said, in doing so, the Maltese authorities had “coordinated a grave violation of international law and of the principle of non-refoulement.” One of the principles of international law is that those rescued must be disembarked in a safe harbor. Alarm Phone and many other international organizations, including UNHCR have repeatedly underlined the fact that Libya can no longer be considered a safe harbor.

Delays endangering lives

The press release also said a second incident involving Maltese RCC had seen a prolonged wait of many hours for another boat reported to be carrying 112 people. The people spent 48 hours at sea according to Alarm Phone, before their eventual rescue by the Maltese Armed Forces. “Non-assistance, delays, and pushbacks are becoming the norm in the Central Mediterranean,” said Alarm Phone, “causing trauma in survivors, disappearances and deaths, both at sea and in Libya.”

On March 14, Alarm Phone which was in contact with the boat carrying 49 migrants said that those on board feared both drowning and being sent back to Libya.

An oil tanker was in the vicinity at the time of the initial distress calls. According to Alarm Phone, the 112 people on board the ship which was eventually rescued by the Maltese armed forced, told them that they feared the tanker would just “watch them die,” rather than trying to rescue them.

Taken to detention centers in Libya

The news agency Associated PressAP said that most of those returned to Tripoli were “taken to detention centers in Libya where there are serious concerns over their safety.”

According to Voice of America, the IOM said that some of the migrants managed to escape the authorities as they disembarked in Libya.

According to an article on Euronews in November 2019, the EU spent over €90 million “over the last two years funding and training the Libyan coast guard in an attempt to keep migrants out of the continent [of Europe.”

Continued cooperation between EU and Libya

In early February the Italian government renewed its memorandum of understanding with the UN-recognized Government of National Unity (GNA) in Libya. The cooperation has included in the past funding and training for the Libyan coast guard from EU member states such as Italy.

In a letter dated February 13, published in the New Humanitarian the Council for Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatovic urged the Italian government to cease cooperation. The commissioner said she was “gravely concerned about certain types of assistance provided to Libya which have resulted in increased interceptions of migrants and asylum seekers at sea, and their subsequent return to Libya, where they are subjected to serious human rights violations.”

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-03-18.

«On Saturday, 14 March 2020, RCC Malta coordinated a push-back operation from the Maltese Search and Rescue (SAR) zone to Libya in cooperation with the EU border agency Frontex and the so-called Libyan coastguards»

«Similar to the events we documented on 18 October 2019, the Maltese authorities instructed the so-called Libyan coastguards to enter a European SAR zone in order to abduct about 49 people and force them back to Libya»

«Instead of complying with refugee and human rights conventions, the Maltese authorities coordinated a grave violation of international law and of the principle of non-refoulment, as the rescued must be disembarked in a safe harbour»

«testimonies of torture, rape and other forms of violence against migrants detained in Libyan camps and prisons»

«On the same day, we alerted the Armed Forces of Malta to a second boat in distress in the Maltese SAR zone with 112 people on board. Before their eventual rescue, the people spent about 48 hours at sea. Malta delayed the rescue for more than 18 hours, putting 112 lives at severe risk»

«Europe continues to delegate border enforcement to the Libyan authorities to evade their responsibility to rescue the distressed to Europe»

«confidential sources have informed us that a Frontex aerial asset had spotted the migrant boat already at 6:00h when it was still in the contested Libyan SAR zone»

«before the push-back occurred they saw a helicopter circling above them. About 30 minutes later, according to their testimonies, a vessel of the so-called Libyan coastguard arrived on scene»

«About 30 minutes later, according to their testimonies, a vessel of the so-called Libyan coastguard arrived on scene»

– In secondo luogo, L’International Organisation for Migration (IOM) è «very concerned about the safety of people detained there and have received no response from the Libyan authorities who were asked to clarify the fate of those reported missing» e «called on the EU “to end the return of vulnerable people to Libya and uphold the principle of non-refoulement” …. Libya is not a safe place to send people back to».

*

Malta has let the Libyan coastguard drag a boat of migrants from Maltese waters back to Libya, violating international law, a UN agency said.

The incident occurred on Sunday (15 March) after the wooden boat, carrying 49 people, became stranded because its engine failed, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), said on Monday.

Malta did it despite the fact Libya is currently in the grip of civil war, with shelling, air strikes, and street battles in the suburbs of Tripoli.

And the 49 people risked being taken back to a notorious facility in the Libyan capital run by the interior ministry, from which people have vanished in the past.

“At least 600 migrants returned from the sea to this facility have been reported missing since January. IOM is very concerned about the safety of people detained there and have received no response from the Libyan authorities who were asked to clarify the fate of those reported missing,” it said in a statement.

It called on the EU “to end the return of vulnerable people to Libya and uphold the principle of non-refoulement”.

“We remind states that … they have a legal and moral responsibility to respond to distress cases at sea,” the IOM said.

“We have confirmation the boat was in fact in Maltese waters when it was picked up by the Libyan coastguard … Libya is not a safe place to send people back to,” an IOM spokeswoman told EUobserver.

Neither Maltese authorities nor EU institutions were immediately available to comment on Monday.

Malta, over the weekend, did rescue another 112 people, the IOM said.

But the Libyan coastguard also intercepted and dragged back 400 more people from Libyan and international waters in the same period.

“The [Libyan] coast guard has returned over 2,500 people to Libya this year. Some were disembarked in Tripoli, hours after the main port in the city came under heavy shelling,” the IOM said.

And EU states’ navies in the region have long faced accusations of working with the Libyans to stop people from coming.

“The Libyan coastguard is not able to locate and track migrant boats itself. In order to do interceptions, they need to be fed from aerial surveillance,” Tamino Böhm, from German NGO Sea Watch, told British newspaper The Guardian in a recent investigation into the collusion.

Sunday’s Maltese incident also comes after Greece pushed back tens of thousands of would-be asylum seekers into Turkey in the past two weeks.

In one case also last weekend, Greek authorities put 450 migrants on a boat on the Greek island of Lesbos and sent them back.

“The Greek naval vessel carrying plus or minus 450 would-be asylum seekers has set sail from Lesbos. Yesterday, officials handed out deportation orders in Greek for people to sign, giving them no chance to lodge asylum claims,” Human Rights Watch, an international NGO, said on Saturday.

Greece also suspended asylum applications for a month and used violence to repel people from its land borders.

But EU institutions declined to censure Athens for its actions, in what amounted to tacit approval for its and Maltese-type push-backs.

And for his part, Greek prime minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis told The Guardian in an interview published also on Monday that he had done nothing wrong.

“I will not tolerate any use of force that will endanger lives,” he said.

“It [the one-month asylum suspension] was necessary to send a clear signal of deterrence,” he added.

There were 16,900 attempts at irregular EU border crossings in the first two months of this year, up 27 percent on the same period last year, the EU border control agency, Frontex, noted.

Some 2,200 of the attempts occurred in the central Mediterranean, near Libya, mostly by people from Bangladesh, Algeria, and Ivory Coast.

More than 7,000 occurred in the eastern Mediterranean, near Greece, mostly by people from Afghanistan, Syria, and Turkey – not counting the new exodus that occurred on 1 March when Turkey gave migrants a green light to cross.

The western Mediterranean, near Spain, saw 2,300 attempts, mostly by Algerians.

And the Western Balkan route saw figures double from last year to 3,800, mostly by people from Syria and Afghanistan.

*

On Saturday, 14 March 2020, RCC Malta coordinated a push-back operation from the Maltese Search and Rescue (SAR) zone to Libya in cooperation with the EU border agency Frontex and the so-called Libyan coastguards.[1] Similar to the events we documented on 18 October 2019, the Maltese authorities instructed the so-called Libyan coastguards to enter a European SAR zone in order to abduct about 49 people and force them back to Libya.[2] Instead of complying with refugee and human rights conventions, the Maltese authorities coordinated a grave violation of international law and of the principle of non-refoulment, as the rescued must be disembarked in a safe harbour.[3] Clearly, Libya is not a safe harbour but a place of war and systemic human rights abuses. Every week, the Alarm Phone receives testimonies of torture, rape and other forms of violence against migrants detained in Libyan camps and prisons.

On the same day, we alerted the Armed Forces of Malta to a second boat in distress in the Maltese SAR zone with 112 people on board.[4] Before their eventual rescue, the people spent about 48 hours at sea. Malta delayed the rescue for more than 18 hours, putting 112 lives at severe risk. Non-assistance, delays, and pushbacks are becoming the norm in the Central Mediterranean, causing trauma in survivors, disappearances and deaths, both at sea and in Libya.

Europe continues to delegate border enforcement to the Libyan authorities to evade their responsibility to rescue the distressed to Europe. We hold Europe accountable for the abuses and suffering inflicted on migrants at sea and in Libya. We condemn the role of European institutions and member states, including Malta and Italy, in these human rights violations through bilateral agreements as well as the financing, equipping, and training of the so-called Libyan coastguards.

Summary of the push-back by proxy case:

On Saturday 14 March 2020, at 15:33h CET, the Alarm Phone received a distress call from 49 people, including one pregnant woman and three children, who were trying to escape from the war in Libya. They had left Tripoli the evening before on a white fiberglass boat. They shared their GPS position with us, which clearly showed them within the Maltese SAR zone (34° 26′ 39 ” N, 14° 07′ 86″ E, at 15:33h). The people on board told us that they had lost their engine and that water was entering the boat. We immediately informed RCC Malta and the Italian coastguard via email. We received updated GPS positions from the people in distress at 16:22h (34° 26 81′ N, 014° 08′ 56″ E) and at 17:07h (N 34° 27′ 12″, E 014° 09′ 37″), both confirming once more that they were drifting within the Maltese SAR zone.

At 17:42h, RCC Malta confirmed via phone that they had sent two patrol boats for the two SAR events in the Maltese SAR zone to which we had alerted them: one for the boat of 49 people and another one for the rubber boat with 112 people on board. Soon after, at 17:45h, we talked to the 49 people on the boat who told us that they could see a boat heading in their direction. Unfortunately, the conversation broke off and we were not able to clarify further details. This was our last contact to the people in distress after which we could not reach them any longer. Since then, we have tried to obtain further details from RCC Malta, but they claim to not have any information.

However, confidential sources have informed us that a Frontex aerial asset had spotted the migrant boat already at 6:00h when it was still in the contested Libyan SAR zone. At 18.04h, the Libyan coastguard vessel Ras Al Jadar intercepted the boat in the Maltese SAR zone at the position N34° 26’, E 14° 07’. This means that the European border agency Frontex, MRCC Rome as well as RCC Malta were all aware of this boat in distress and colluded with the Libyan authorities to enter Maltese SAR and intercept the migrant boat.

On Sunday 15 March 2020, at 7:00h, we were called by relatives of the people on board who told us that the people in distress had just informed them that they had been abducted by a Libyan vessel from within the Maltese SAR zone and returned to Libya, where, according to their testimonies, they were imprisoned and battered. In the afternoon, we were called by the people who were on the boat, and they testified that before the push-back occurred they saw a helicopter circling above them. About 30 minutes later, according to their testimonies, a vessel of the so-called Libyan coastguard arrived on scene. The people stated that the Libyan officers behaved brutally toward them, beating them repeatedly. They also stated that they were prevented from filming and documenting these abuses as their phones were confiscated. Moreover, the people reported that they had travelled together with another boat, a white rubber boat with around 60 people on board (including 7 women and 1 woman with a nine-month-old infant). Also this second boat[5] was intercepted and returned to Libya and its passengers experienced similar forms of violence and abuse.

*

«We’re investing in refineries»

«What was invested this year is going to be repeated next year, …. more than 12 billion pesos ($600 million) toward revamping oil production»

«Under the proposal, the energy ministry’s budget would jump more than 70% compared to last year, to 48.5 billion pesos ($2.4 billion), following a budget increase this year of over 900% compared to 2018»

«96% of the money is intended to support oil and natural gas related projects»

«70% is being set aside for transporting natural gas, a somewhat cleaner fossil fuel»

«Conspicuously absent from the budget, advocates say, is funding for expanding renewables, despite the country’s potential to adopt clean energy»

«the president has prioritized ending Mexico’s entrenched poverty but is using oil as the primary engine to drive prosperity»

«He should care about climate change, but between climate change and going down in history for ending poverty… well obviously he prefers that»

*

On the same September day that activist Greta Thurnberg gave a fiery speech in New York demanding world leaders tackle climate change, Mexico’s president was touting achievements of a wholly different kind: increasing funding for oil production.

“We’re investing in refineries. It hasn’t been done for a long time,” President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador told reporters at a news conference in Mexico City.

“What was invested this year is going to be repeated next year,” promised Lopez Obrador, noting that the government had already funneled more than 12 billion pesos ($600 million) toward revamping oil production.

The leftist leader, who was elected in a landslide last July, has framed the investment as a way to wean Mexico off its dependency on foreign energy supplies, as well as fueling economic development through increased oil production.

But at a time when countries are facing mounting pressure to curb emissions and stave off threats from a warming climate, environmental experts say the Mexican government is moving in the wrong direction.

“While Mexico should be abandoning (oil) production, they’re rehabilitating refineries … under a logic of national sovereignty,” said Leon Avila, a professor of sustainable development at the Intercultural University of Chiapas.

“It’s an archaic perspective, based on production in the 70s during the oil boom, and they think they can do the same thing – when really we’re in another context,” he told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

On Monday, Mexico’s government announced it would expand the rules of its “clean energy certificates” (CEL) programme to make them available to older hydroelectric plants operated by state utility company CFE.

The program previously applied only to new projects, creating an incentive for local and foreign firms to invest in green energy.

The CEL-certified energy can be sold to big companies that are required to obtain a percentage of their electricity from clean sources.

But in a statement on Tuesday, CFE director general Manuel Bartlett Diaz said that, in line with the president’s vision for energy sovereignty, there was “no reason to subsidize private (electricity) generating companies”.

The Mexican CCE business council said on Tuesday that the change could jeopardize up to $9 billion in foreign and local clean energy investments tied to the original CEL rules.

“The decision detracts from the only mechanism considered by law to drive Mexico’s energy transition and meet the mandatory national clean energy adoption goals,” the CCE said in a statement.

MORE OIL, LESS POVERTY?

The Lopez Obrador administration has emphasized its commitment to tackle climate change and adhere to the Paris accord.

At a UN climate conference last December, Sergio Sanchez, then undersecretary for environmental protection, said the government would implement “concrete policies and actions focused both on reducing emissions and adapting to climate change”.

The Mexican senate last week also called on the federal government to declare a “climate emergency” and take necessary steps to address climate threats.

Those can range from wilder weather and rising seas to more crop-killing droughts that can drive worsening poverty and migration.

But at a press conference the following day, the president shied away from recognizing climate change as a crisis.

“We have already considered a series of measures to face the climate change phenomenon in the Development Plan,” Lopez Obrador said.

But the president’s description of the plan – listing conservation efforts but omitting any policies to reduce emissions – irked environmentalists.

“There is a lack of understanding for the climate crisis we are confronting,” said Claudia Campero from the Mexican Alliance Against Fracking, an advocacy group.

According to Avila, the university professor, the president has prioritized ending Mexico’s entrenched poverty but is using oil as the primary engine to drive prosperity.

“He should care about climate change, but between climate change and going down in history for ending poverty… well obviously he prefers that,” Avila said.

Among Lopez Obrador’s most important projects is the construction of a new oil refinery in his home state of Tabasco. The project is set to cost $8 billion, and the government says it would generate up to 23,000 jobs.

But besides boosting Mexico’s carbon footprint, the refinery, at a coastal site, is vulnerable to climate threats, environmental experts said. Local media reported this week that the property had flooded due to heavy rains.

MORE CASH FOR OIL AND GAS

Environmentalists also point with concern to the government’s proposed 2020 budget, which would see fossil fuel funding continue to increase.

Under the proposal, the energy ministry’s budget would jump more than 70% compared to last year, to 48.5 billion pesos ($2.4 billion), following a budget increase this year of over 900% compared to 2018.

According to an analysis of the budget published in September by a coalition of environmental groups, 96% of the money is intended to support oil and natural gas related projects.

“There is no room for more development of fossil fuel extraction,” said Campero, the fracking opponent. “(But) that’s far from being the vision of this government.”

The budget does include about 56 billion pesos ($2.8 billion) for “adaptation and mitigation of the effects of climate change,” but of this, 70% is being set aside for transporting natural gas, a somewhat cleaner fossil fuel, Campero said.

A spokeswoman for the Mexican environment ministry did not respond to numerous requests for comment.

Conspicuously absent from the budget, advocates say, is funding for expanding renewables, despite the country’s potential to adopt clean energy.

According to a 2017 study from the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, which focuses on promoting democracy and social programs, 80% of Mexico’s energy currently comes from fossil fuels.

But the country’s landscape and weather conditions mean it could supply its electricity needs entirely from renewable sources, the study noted.

The Lopez Obrador administration has appeared reticent to capitalize on this potential, however. In January, the government canceled a public auction for companies to bid on clean energy contracts.

“Mexico is a very rich country in terms of its potential in renewables,” said Pablo Ramirez, a campaigner at Greenpeace Mexico.

“But since the arrival of the new administration, that’s been completely scrubbed off the map.”

Mexico’s 2020 budget is awaiting final approval by congress this month.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-10-17.

International charity Amnesty International has joined Polish opposition parties in an outcry on a Polish government-backed bill to criminalise some forms of sex education. “This recklessly retrogressive law would encourage fear and ignorance”, it said Wednesday. “This bill, which equates homosexuality with paedophilia, exposes the disturbing homophobia that underpins this law,” Amnesty added. The law could see teachers jailed for years for discussing issues such as gender fluidity with under-18s.

* * * * * * *

«The Supreme Court on Wednesday cleared the way for President Trump and his administration to enforce a ban on nearly all asylum seekers arriving at the southern border.»

«In a one-paragraph order, the justices by a 7-2 vote granted an emergency appeal from Trump administration lawyers and set aside decisions from judges in California who had blocked the president’s new rule from taking effect.»

«While it is not a final ruling on the issue, the decision is nonetheless a major victory for Trump and his effort to restrict immigration because it allows the asylum ban to be enforced at the southern border while the dispute wends its way through the courts. That potentially could last for the remainder of Trump’s current term in office.»

«Wednesday’s order is further evidence that Trump is changing how the Supreme Court works. Prior to 2017, it was rare for federal judges to issue nationwide orders that blocked actions of the federal government. And it was also rare for the high court to intervene in such pending cases with emergency orders, rather than holding oral arguments and releasing written decisions.»

«In late July, the justices cleared the way by a 5-4 vote for Trump to spend $2.5 billion from the military budget to pay for border wall construction. Congress had refused to appropriate the money, and a federal judge in Oakland and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco blocked the transfer.»

«U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar in San Francisco agreed and issued a nationwide injunction that barred enforcement of the new rule. The 9th Circuit Court upheld this order, but restricted its reach to California and Arizona.»

«U.S. Solicitor Gen. Noel Francisco filed an emergency appeal with the Supreme Court in late August in the case of Barr vs. East Bay Sanctuary Covenant. He urged the justices to lift the injunction and allow the new rule to take effect immediately. Doing so would “alleviate a crushing burden on the U.S. asylum system,” he said.»

* * * * * * *

«SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. No. 19A230.

The application for stay presented to JUSTICE KAGAN and by her referred to the Court is granted. The district court’s July 24, 2019 order granting a preliminary injunction andSeptember 9, 2019 order restoring the nationwide scope of the injunction are stayed in full pending disposition of the Government’s appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and disposition of the Government’spetition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is sought. If a writ of certiorari is sought and the Court denies the peti­tion, this order shall terminate automatically. If the Court grants the petition for a writ of certiorari, this order shall terminate when the Court enters its judgment.»

*

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to allow a rule limiting asylum claims to go into effect nationwide while a lower court ruling blocking it is appealed.

A federal judge had blocked the Trump administration rule, which dramatically limits the ability of Central American migrants to claim asylum if they enter the US by land through Mexico, nationwide. Earlier this month, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals dialed back the nationwide injunction, saying that it can only apply to migrants claiming asylum in California and Arizona, states that fall under the Ninth Circuit’s jurisdiction.

In its filing Monday, the administration laid out its case for the rule, arguing that, among other things, it “alleviates a crushing burden on the US asylum system” and deters migrants from coming to the US.

“The injunction now in effect is deeply flawed and should be stayed pending appeal and pending any further proceedings in this Court,” the filing reads.

The Trump administration has rolled out a slew of policies in recent weeks to try to curb migration to the United States amid high border apprehension numbers. The solicitor general acknowledged the uptick in illegal border crossings in Monday’s filing.

The rule, which was issued from the departments of Justice and Homeland Security in July, would prohibit migrants who have resided in or traveled through a third country from seeking asylum in the US, therefore barring migrants traveling through Mexico from being able to claim asylum. The result would be a severe limiting of who’s eligible for asylum.

Immigrant advocacy groups have claimed the rule is unlawful and leaves migrants in harm’s way.

In his July ruling, US District Judge Jon Tigar, a Barack Obama nominee, in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, wrote, “This new rule is likely invalid because it is inconsistent with the existing asylum laws.”

“An injunction,” Tigar added, “would vindicate the public’s interest — which our existing immigration laws clearly articulate — in ensuring that we do not deliver aliens into the hands of their persecutors.”

The US District Court for the Northern District of California will hold a hearing in early September.

*

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is allowing nationwide enforcement of a new Trump administration rule that prevents most Central American immigrants from seeking asylum in the United States.

The justices’ order late Wednesday temporarily undoes a lower-court ruling that had blocked the new asylum policy in some states along the southern border. The policy is meant to deny asylum to anyone who passes through another country on the way to the U.S. without seeking protection there.

Most people crossing the southern border are Central Americans fleeing violence and poverty. They are largely ineligible under the new rule, as are asylum seekers from Africa, Asia and South America who arrive regularly at the southern border.

The shift reverses decades of U.S. policy. The administration has said that it wants to close the gap between an initial asylum screening that most people pass and a final decision on asylum that most people do not win.

“BIG United States Supreme Court WIN for the Border on Asylum!” Trump tweeted.

The legal challenge to the new policy has a brief but somewhat convoluted history. U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar in San Francisco blocked the new policy from taking effect in late July. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals narrowed Tigar’s order so that it applied only in Arizona and California, states that are within the 9th Circuit.

That left the administration free to enforce the policy on asylum seekers arriving in New Mexico and Texas. Tigar issued a new order on Monday that reimposed a nationwide hold on asylum policy. The 9th Circuit again narrowed his order on Tuesday.

The high-court action allows the administration to impose the new policy everywhere while the court case against it continues.

Lee Gelernt, the American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who is representing immigrant advocacy groups in the case, said: “This is just a temporary step, and we’re hopeful we’ll prevail at the end of the day. The lives of thousands of families are at stake.”